# data[].attributes.body
Is there a focus source? Should there be a focus source?

# data[].attributes.body
For History, should marks be allocated for context if question does not specifically ask for it?

# data[].attributes.body
For simple inference, if students do not use question phrasing, is it 0 marks?

# data[].attributes.body
Should not teach main writing style as 1 similar + 1 difference. Should be 1 content 1 purpose

# data[].attributes.body
If a student does not give all the requirements for a purpose paragraph, do you allocate a lower level marks (i.e. Level 3 description) or a lower mark at a higher level (e.g. Level 5 4m or Level 5 5m?)

# data[].attributes.body
Should we modify the way we teach this skill structurally for the NA students? Giving a much high mark range for cross-reference

# data[].attributes.headline
Penalise for all graded assignments and class tests too?

# data[].attributes.subject
Penalise for all graded assignments and class tests too?

# data[].attributes.body
Also for NA?

# data[].attributes.body
Must the students write
an explanation, even when the inference and evidence itself is obvious / self-explanatory

# data[].attributes.body
How high can we give if the students x-reference or do the purpose for the non-focus source?

# data[].attributes.body
Necessary to state source is useful because it is reliable. source is not useful because it is not reliable. (?)

# data[].attributes.body
Does this question require two purpose - one for each?

# data[].attributes.body
In the setting of assertion question, do we have to have other parts that have to deliberately avoid the same issue as the assertion issue?

# data[].attributes.body
Can this be taught together with Reliability or is it a separate skill altogether?

# data[].attributes.body
Can I say Source is not useful before there is missing info?

# data[].attributes.headline
Should group the sources or alternate them?

# data[].attributes.subject
Should group the sources or alternate them?

# data[].attributes.body
Can we use biased/unreliable sources for cross-reference? I would argue yes, because Surprise deals with the extent to which sources adhere to or contradict previous expectations, not bias.